For the first two days at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference in Dallas, two Mason jars of pinto beans had been casually set on a table to measure support for the war in Iran, and for much of the event, the bean count was close, with a few more “yes” pintos than “no” pintos.
Then at some point late Thursday, or perhaps in the wee hours of Friday morning, a huge infusion beans materialized to tip the scales toward giving war a chance.
Rigged or not, the unofficial poll, featured in a booth set up by a group called Republicans for National Renewal, captured the week’s events as the organizers of CPAC — which in recent years has served as a platform for America First anti-interventionists — have tried to keep the faithful on the White House bandwagon. That wasn’t easy as gasoline prices soared, stocks sagged and Americans wondered how long the military action might last.
For many of those years, President Trump has come to CPAC to promise his followers that he was no fan of American military action overseas. This year, he was not scheduled to speak. But evidence of a conservative rift over the war he and Israel began a month ago was everywhere.
Like the bean count, the event, headed up by the Trump superfans Matt and Mercedes Schlapp, seemed to lean, institutionally, in favor of the military action. But questions of how long it might last — and concerns over the possibility that Mr. Trump might press ahead with a ground force — were top of mind for many speakers and attendees.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Friday that the United States would not need to deploy ground troops to win the war, which he said would be over within weeks, not months. But the possibility of a longer and bloodier conflict was a notable source of concern at CPAC.
“A ground invasion of Iran will make our country poorer and less safe,” Matt Gaetz, the former Florida congressman, warned the crowd on Thursday. “It will mean higher gas prices, higher food prices, and I’m not sure we would end up killing more terrorists than we would create in Iran.”
On Friday afternoon, the former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, who had been expressing skepticism about the war during live broadcasts of his “War Room” podcast, took to the main stage, his brief comments renamed the “Peace Room.”
The crowd should back Mr. Trump, he said, but to do that, they would need to be convinced that the war was the course of action, “particularly now that we are on the eve of, potentially, the insertion of American combat troops.”
“Your sons, daughters, granddaughters and grandsons could be on Kharg Island and be holding a beachhead down by the Strait of Hormuz,” he warned.
Mr. Trump’s past appearances at CPAC would not have prepared his supporters for such possibilities. They carried an explicit message that “America First” specifically applied to military action overseas.
“We will expel the warmongers,” he said at CPAC in 2023, the people who, he said in 2024, had “gorged themselves on the spoils of endless wars.”
“It’s my hope that my greatest legacy will be as a peacemaker,” he said at CPAC last year, “not a conqueror.”
Recent polling more scientific than a jar of beans demonstrates the pickle Mr. Trump and his institutional supporters at CPAC may soon find themselves in. An AP-NORC poll conducted from March 19 to 23 showed that 26 percent of Republicans thought the war had gone too far, a sizable splinter. About half of Republicans were either “somewhat” or “strongly” opposed to sending in U.S. troops.
Overall, the poll showed, about six in 10 Americans at least somewhat oppose boots on the ground in Iran.
John Solomon, a correspondent for the right-leaning outlet Just the News who attended CPAC, acknowledged that Mr. Trump could face more trouble if the war goes on much longer.
“The president I’ve talked to, and I’ve interviewed several times, never said, ‘I wouldn’t use military action to start wars,’” Mr. Solomon said. “He said, ‘I would never get engaged in an long war.’”
“That’s the fulcrum upon which he’ll be judged upon,” he concluded.
Trying to set the tone at CPAC’s opening on Wednesday, leaders passed a resolution that declared “solidarity with the Iranian people,” and declared, “Thank you President Trump, for leading the charge.”
On Thursday, the evangelist Franklin Graham seemed to take a shot at the chorus of conservative war critics, like Mr. Bannon. “Be cautious of people with podcasts,” Mr. Graham said.
Mark Wallace, the chief executive of the group United Against Nuclear Iran, and formerly an ambassador in the George W. Bush administration, predicted America would either force regime change “right now” or leave behind a government in Tehran that will be “so decimated the Iranian people will still rise up and defeat” it.
In the halls of the convention center, Iranian Americans were vocal and conspicuous. They milled around with pins that said “Ask me about Iran,” their buttons and hats emblazoned with “MIGA,” for Make Iran Great Again. Many draped themselves in the pre-revolution Iranian flag, a red, white and green tricolor with a golden lion in the center that stood out among the stars and stripes.
On Thursday morning, their boisterous cheers interrupted a panel titled “MAGA vs. Mullah Madness,” where two women described their brutal treatment at the hands of the regime. They also chanted their support for Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of the last Iranian shah, who is expected to speak on Saturday.
In a foyer outside the meeting hall, scores of Iranians from Canada and the United States gathered with a rousing chant of “Thank you, Trump.” Ali Riahi Samani, 35, a computer scientist from Dallas who left Iran nine years ago, said he supported sending U.S. troops to make sure the government falls. Mass protests would not be enough.
“Without any military intervention that wouldn’t be possible,” he said, “because we tried that.”
Downstairs, at the Republicans for National Renewal booth, Alex Johnson, 26, a real estate agent from Georgia, was staffing the rudimentary bean-counting operation and made his views clear, politely. “No boots on the ground,” he told a person dropping a bean in the pro-war jar. “My little brother’s 15. I don’t want a 20-year-war that sees him go get drafted off to go get blown up.”
He wasn’t surprised at CPAC’s pro-war tilt. “CPAC does whatever Trump wants,” he said. “In previous years they were antiwar, now they’re pro-war.”
George Yang, 49, an information technology worker from Menlo Park, Calif., did not drop a bean, but he said he was worried that Washington was repeating the mistakes of Iraq and Afghanistan. He carried a red binder with his personal plan for encouraging the Iranians to write a new constitution, “as a part of the condition of a cease-fire,” he said.
Tina Blanco, 63, a business owner from Nevada, dropped a bean in the “yes” pile. “These people are stupid,” she said of those who’d put “no” beans. She pointed to the “yes” beans. “These people are smart.”
Mr. Johnson interjected, “Now hold on, hold on, why do you say these people are stupid?”
“Because I’m originally from Iraq, and I know what it’s like to live under that kind of a regime,” she said, one that would not think twice about killing its own citizens. “So you’ve got to stop them before they get the opportunity.”
She added: “America is very smart and fighting the war by mostly air and by other technology. I don’t think it’s going to be boots on the ground.”
Kellen Browning contributed reporting from Dallas.
Richard Fausset, a Times reporter based in Atlanta, writes about the American South, focusing on politics, culture, race, poverty and criminal justice.
The post At CPAC, the ‘America First’ Crowd Ponders Giving War a Chance appeared first on New York Times.
